I think that around here just remembering to make some noise so a bear has a chance to know you're there is the best way of protecting yourself against a bad outcome. I try to make a point to do that and I have no doubt that's why I don't see many bears here.

It's a wondrous thing to move through our forest here, off the trail, in the heart of it. It's a very seductive experience and it makes it incredibly hard to resist being quiet and stealthy, but that's stupid.

There are still occasions when I realize I've been moving pretty fast and very quietly and being stupid. When that happens I quickly acknowledge I've been lucky again and I thank my guardian spirits for watching out for me, then I make some noise and stay put for a minute or two.

hmmmm... I grew up hunting in the woods and my father is a pretty serious bird watcher. So, (maybe out of habit) I naturally am quiet and stealthy in the woods. I figure I am there to see nature and don't take steps to prevent that. Maybe its stupid but I am not afraid of bears or mountain lions. I would much rather see these animals than scare them away for minute increases in safety. I keep my wits about myself and don't put myself into dangerous situations. I don't pull Steve Irwin's when I'm out in the woods but I definitely try to see the animals I am sharing the woods with (even if they could become dangerous under certain circumstances). Would you consider that foolhardy?

You should certainly take the appropriate actions for the environment you are in (and I do). But, I see bells, whistles, and loud talking as techniques to slightly reduce the chance of a bad interaction with these animals but mostly to help allay fears that people have. Some people get freaked out by seeing a bear... I don't. I get excited to see such a magnificent creature in the wild.

Well, I do admit my goal is to NOT see bears or moose. I figure their not being surprised by me is worth it. If I want to see a bear I go to the zoo. If I want to see a moose, I watch extra carefully on the way home

I don't constantly make noise - just in places where visibility is reduced - say a willow thicket.

I get excited to see such a magnificent creature in the wild.

Just as long as those magnificent creatures have no interest in treating me like prey, I agree. I noticed a long time ago that prey animals have very different feelings about predators than they do about non-predators, and that my status as an alpha predator makes walking in the wild a much more agreeable experience.

I think this is more of a regional thing. It's probably easier to sneak up on a bear here than in the west. You could never see a bear a mile away here, or even a few hundred feet in most cases.

What I am avoiding is coming face to face with one and startling it. The truth is, even traveling very stealthily the odds of startling a bear are very low, but I have done it.

The bear that was hiding from me was likely there because I came up on it so quickly and quietly. I was stupid enough to stop and take off my pack within feet of where it was hiding, and at that point I'm sure the bear felt trapped and threatened.

My stupidity in that incidence still stuns me. My luck in getting out of it unscathed still amazes me. That the two people with me, who followed me there, did not get hurt still makes me stop and give thanks, and I have to be honest and realize that the outcome could have been much different.

My experience has been that to see wildlife it's best to sit still and be quiet. You have to wait at least 20 minutes before the forest even starts to become active again, and it picks up slowly and gradually after that. Finding a spot near a game trail is best. Deer can see you blink an eye and they react to it. Coyotes will trot right by you and never know you were there. I've never had a bear walk up on me while doing that.

I do that a lot. It's one of the reasons I don't make many miles when I solo, but you can sure see a lot when you do it. It takes patience and discipline though, and some luck. I swear I've had crows come sit in a tree near me and caw like crazy, and keep coming back every few minutes and doing it again. I get the feeling they think it's funny

Some relevant reading (other related articles also linked from the page):

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/03/120306131921.htm

I have taken Gun safty. I have a concelled carry firarm permit. I still debate need to carry for bears? Someone said sleeping with a loaded gun is dangerous? Well a unloaded gun is a Rock and no better! I sleep with a loaded gun every night. Gun training and practice weekly is the correct answer! This is if you choose to carry? Otherwise leave it at home. I still contest bear spray would be most effective. When the good lord says it is time its Time. My wife and children can all shoot and know where they are. But if you have nill for training and do not practice. No one should carry! Without proper permit it is ten years in the slammer. For bears I say spray. Maybe even in a state park and stumble upon drug growers? This is a growing problem as well ,and most likley more dangerous situation! Check laws state to state. They all vary! http://www.handgunlaw.us/ Knowing the law where you are is the gun owners responsibility! Seriously, if you are not confident and practiced with carrying a loaded gun, Take a Rock or bear spray instead. Remember every bullet has ten lawyers attached to it! Take a saftey class or two and consider. It is a Constitutional right that is currently challenged bye careless mistakes .

Rule #1- go in groups. Well, most of us here on this forum are in violation of that rule!

I think gun owners have an inflated idea of their expertise. Military combat vetrans- yes, I think they would be able to respond. The average gun owner and hunter - I doubt it. A hunter safety course is not enough.

I laughed at the comment "every bullet has 10 lawyers attached". How true. Out here in California we also have the animal rights faction. Yogi in court with his own lawyer, LOL.

I also wanted to get response on one element that has not been commented on.

My friend had TWO loaded guns in a tent with himself and two kids. That seemed potentially dangerous from the standpoint that in the event of any kind of encounter there is likely to be a certain amount of chaos and one person may not be able to track what is happening with both guns. Not being a gun user myself, (I don't happen to hunt but am not against it and recognize carrying is a constitutional right), I would particularly like to get a response on this from those who do have gun experience.

It depends - on the owner and the kids. Are you talking a long gun and a hand gun? What age kids? What up bringing? I will tell you I had guns readily available throughout my life, even through my horrible high school years. I NEVER touched one without permission. My family - who ever found out - would have killed me. Not literally, but I would have rathered death over the screaming, probably a good beating and embarrassament. So.... it depends. =)

I am assuming one of the guns was a long gun, unless he take a new york reload.

In my opinion, it would depend on the kids. If they were undisciplined and headstrong there is a potential problem. If they are level-headed, responsible and have been taught gun safety then the risk is much reduced. My 11-year-old granddaughter has been taught safe gun handling since she was old enough to recognize a gun. She enjoys shooting and has her own rifle and target pistol. I would trust her more in such a situation than I would a lot of adults - perhaps most adults.

I would agree, it depends upon the people involved, including the adult who might be groping, half awake, for a firearm in a potential crisis. Children who have been properly trained are often more responsible than many adults. Mine certainly are, and I can scarcely imagine what might have befallen me if I had ever handled a gun carelessly.

Needing two loaded weapons in a tent as a routine matter seems a bit excessive, however. Looks like one might do better at choosing campsites if that is the case - or choose to sleep under a tarp, where your field of fire will not be so restricted and you can identify your problem more easily and at a greater distance.

There are three kinds of gun people in my experience. Those who don't feel they need one, and do fine. Those who are trained and competent, yet don't let the arm become the center of their trip. And those that live in such paranoia (fear without reason) that they become owned by their weapons.
I had a highschool friend who was killed buy his father on a deer hunting trip. They were in a camper...friend opened the door to go out for a break, dad awoke from a bad dream and shot him with a deer rifle. Or at least that was his story. Was dad that impulsive at home? I doubt it.

I've hiked/camped with people...(only once) ;), that can't seem to keep their booger hooks of their guns, knives, etc., and spend the trip worrying about that critter or crazed maniac that would attack their one tent, out of 500 square miles.

Folks if you choose to be armed, please make sure your fears are rational, and for goodness sake get some training and stay trained. Use of any arm must be instinctive, or it's useless and dangerous. If you have to ask a "what kind of arms?" questions on an open camping/hiking forum, you aren't trained!! Not even close. Once trained, the question answers itself.

I think it is an open question as to which is the greater danger, the wild animal or the firearm carried to ward off the wild animal. Statistics may be available. I know that I have dealt with more injuries/fatalities due to gunshot wounds than to animal attacks - the score is something like four to zero.

Well put Dyer!

Oldranger, do I read that correctly? In all your years as a park ranger you never had to deal with someone injured by a wild animal? I would of thought you must have dealt with some snot nosed kid who cornered a squirrel at some point in time. Very interesting anecdotal evidence from someone with considerable experience.

I really like this thread, too bad the OP seems to have disappeared. Perhaps he is out backpacking

If you are interested in this sort of thing, there's books like Death in Yosemite and Death in the Grand Canyon that tabulate all the ways people die in the national parks.

Yosemite, for all its crazy habituated creatures, has only had the one fatality due to critter interaction - a freak accident involving a young deer and a toddler. Not just anecdotal.

Statistically speaking deer cause more human fatalities than the predators do.

I didn't disappear. I've been appreciatively reading the responses.

Just a clarification about the multiple guns situation. In this case the kids are extremely well-behaved and I believe have been very well trained with guns. My concern was not with any of them fully conscious and in the light of day competently handling their weapons, but more with the potential chaos if there were any kind of perception of attack -- flying squirrel hitting the tent, or whatever-- that could have not only one half awake adult but a couple of kids blundering around in confusion or panic from a perceived danger that they couldn't even see. Clearly the adult can only control one gun at a time.

They were either both long guns or one long and one short. . .

I think I've written about this before---but the guy who cleaned our carpets was really interested in backpacking, and when he saw our equipment, he had a ton of questions.

The main one being: what kind of sidearm did we carry.

We don't.

And we asked him what kind of sidearm he carried when he worked in the various towns and cities in our area.

He doesn't

So somehow he was far more worried about meeting someone in the High Sierra than on a side street in Vallejo.

And my fears run the other way.

That is correct. It also includes a couple of decades as a volunteer SAR field hand (That's where the firearm incidents occurred) centered around Tucson, AZ. Interestingly, we did not respond to a single rattlesnake bite either in that period. I have no accurate recollection of the numer of fall victims, and drowning victims we recovered, but it was a numer well into double figures. People die from falls,drowning, bad weather, and automobile accidents, not from wild animals.

I've not been following this thread, but noticed (with complete agreement) the above comment.

Which summarizes very well why I've not been following this thread ...

Bear spray has been a far better proven method as bear deterrent than guns. And actually more people die from accidental ghun shot wound while in the backcountry than from any sort of wild animal attack, bringing a gun actually increases the chance of being killed or injured.

As a “forest ranger” (a forester that works on a state forest) I carry as part of my job but do not carry while hiking. We do have bears here in SC but I would be more concerned with wild hogs. It would take a .357 or larger and a good shot to stop a largeish charging animal, weight I can’t justify. Deer kill more people than bears and snakes and bees kill more people than any other animal. Now an untrained person totting a gun would be scary if attacked by a swarm.

When I worked on Santa Rosa Island (Channel islands National Park) we had to deal with wild hogs. On just one occasion, I and the two young ladies I was with were charged without provocation. Had I been carrying, I would probably have drawn and fired. As it was, a well placed boot right on his snout discouraged Mr. Hog and he departed for greener pastures. The whole episode did impress the future Mrs. Old Ranger.

In terms of actual fatalities, I understand bees kill more people than any other critter. What would be the appropriate caliber for them? - the .218 Bee?

I am always distressed by discussions of what firearms to carry to handle bear and mountain attacks. The weight and money devoted to firearms would be more rationally applied in any number of more useful ways.

Another paper of interest to topic at hand:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15974255

One of the key phrases: "most nonvenomous injuries are probably caused by farm animals." This report does not distinguish between wild and domesticated, and lumps cows, horses, bears, sharks, alligators, etc. all together under "other specified animal."

What I learned: a fraction of all deaths are caused by animals (this covers a decade).